


^V o^ *,,->• ,0^ V^ -o^o^ ^^"^ "-o 'c,^' ,0-' V *» 

\ ^'- ^^ -^^^ \ 'i- ^ •^-.. 



^^ * o « ' <;,^ O ^ .■ , , ,0 ^r> " = ,., ' ^<vN O 






^ 2 



. ^..-iV .J^\ '\ ;/ '/''^;::- V-^-^-/ ^^"'\ ^- s^ ^^ 






A' 






^ *> 



* '.V' X. -' * V/ -X ' * '.V ^'- -^ V 






o 



s 

•>'_ 










^ 

'^-^. 


^'^ 


<^ 



.s^'V ; : A^-V. ^. ..,./; .^^V ^ . -.^ 



■/...» rA ■T'. A ^ ^» . « CA 



^, 



* 'X 



> 



,0' 'c) ... A <. 'o . . « G^ \^ A 



K^' 



. 4 



,-Jv 



^^0^ 



.-i^' ^M 



>y7 



'<i> 



^ 






''-^z. ^^ 






'o^^:. 



0^ 






'^o *,■',.•' ..0- 






,^' 






o > 



-r 






o 



/^"v0vN:3 



,0' 



v> 



V 



'>*> 



V'^^ 



o ,0 



<?■ * 3 « O 



^^ 



,0 



,s 


vT' 


."^■^ 


^r^ 


V- 


"^^^ 



aV 



x^-^-. 



\^. 


















.V 






0-^ 



O " 



V <C 



■r-^^ 






,<^ 



^ 



s 



n 



^^L 



> 



\- 






' ' " ° ' c\ 






^°^ 



^^. .<:> 



' ^^ \' '* > V 



^^ 



A. 















'\ 



y 



.0^ 






/\ 



4 O 









0' 



.0 -7- 

^ " = ~ ° ' .N>^ 






-^ 



<^^ 



■,/• 



H O^ 



\pS- 



fe'KjO'" ^ 



'■^ 






,-^ 



"Jy 



<^ 



^f. 












L ' O 






->- ^■^ 






'^^. 









<^ 



<^ 






-f 



c 



0^ . . " . 






s ^' 






O ^\X^ 















aX 













M#/ 



-,> ,,,,v .>,^;?/'<. ■"^^. .'i-- / 



<P- ^ N 



v^^ 



< 






;i ^fi#^ i\ 







.0 



.^ 



" o 



^' 






/Jl\)' 



^)i-; 



.0^ ^o 



^.yt<' ■> 






'•^ 



^<^ 



<'. 



6r 

' O » A 



-V 



'^O 



A 



'^ 



X' 



rV 
it 




'UVl.^^■U,^l,. 1-^ 



I, >' * 



' is 



BROUGHT FROM ENGLAND. 



.0 



RICHARD SEYMOR 

HARTFORD, 1640 



A PAPER 



READ BEFORE 



The Connecticut Chapter Daughters 

of Founders and Patriots 

of America 

At Norwalk^ Conn.^ February 13th, ^903 



',.. ii,> i'\ J>\ y>, 






• o ' « • 



By 
MRS. MARIA WATSON PINNEY 
Derby, Conn. ^ 



Co 



a\ 



^.^ 



nr 



^ 



^ 



p. 

(Person). 



C ( C c ( 



* « 


« ' * * 




t r, • 




t J 


„ 


( t- i 




< 






« *. 


c(^ « f 




c « 


t 




\ c 


« ( a 




« 






c 


* * « t 


( c « 


C t (r 







THE TUTTLE, MOREHOUSE 4 TAYLOR PRESS, NEW 



RICHARD SEYMOUR. 



Madam President : — When I pledged to write 
what I had gathered from tradition, from investiga- 
tion and from the research of others, relative to 
Richard Seymour, I did not understand that a very 
competent party had nearly completed the geneal- 
ogy of his five succeeding generations, although I 
knew it had been discussed for twenty-five years, 
but I supposed its publication as far in the future 
as ever. 

It stands without question that a genealogy can 
not be published without funds, and while the time 
has passed since the work has been in preparation, 
several parties who were interested, and would 
probably have subscribed for more than one copy, 
have passed " the dark river, which has never been 
shadowed by a homeward sail," and they who have 
spent time and money collecting and arranging 
material for the book, have waited for funds to 
publish. 

If my article can induce any person who inherits 
the blood of Richard Seymour to assist in this 
publication, by subscribing for the same, I shall 
have helped forward a meritorious work. 

There being in the near future a probability that 
two or three volumes of genealogical statistics will 
be published, it is useless for me in a paper of 
thirty minutes to refer to his descendants. 



— 4— 

Who was Richard Seymour ? who came to Hart- 
ford in 1639/40, and was one of the signers of the 
agreement for planting Norwalk June 19th, 1650, 
and among the first settlers soon after. He died 
between the dates July 29, 1655, wdien his will 
was made, and October 25, 1655, when the court 
approved the inventory. 

He mentions in his will his wife Mercy, son 
Thomas, and three other sons, namely: John, 
Zachary and Richard, who being under age, he 
left to their mother's guardianship. 

Mr. Henry \V. Seymour, of Washington, D. C, 
writes, " It is singular that the wills of two Richard 
Seymours should be so similar." 

One, the nuncupative wall of Richard Seymour 
of August i6th, 1637, and buried at Berry-Pomeroy, 
County of Devon, England, which says : " That 
lyttell that I have, I will leave ytt to the mother's 
disposinge, the Children shall be under the mother, 
not the mother them."- 

Col. Vivian, in his Histor}^ or " Visitation of 
Devon," states : I think it reasonably clear that Mr. 
Richard Seymour, son of William, third son of Sir 
Edward Seymour, and who married Mary Stretch- 
ley at Plimpton St. Mary, May 26*'' 1626, License 
granted May 5"' 1626, was buried Aug. 1637, ^^ 
Elizabeth (Seymour) Cary wife of Sir George Cary 
of Cockington declares January'- 19^'' 1638, that Mr. 
Richard Seymour's inventory was taken by Henr}^ 
Champernoune of Dartington Esq. Nicholas Ball 
of Tormohan, merchant, and another, Mr. Richard 



Seymour leaving one son Richard who wa.s never 
married, and was buried at Cockington August 26"' 
1684, also there were three daughters, Amy, Bridget 
and Anne. 

Hart. So. " Visitation of Devon," 1620, vol. 6, 
page 53, says : 

Elizabeth daughter of Gawain Champernoune, 
Aunt of Henry Champernoune of Dartington 
Esq., married for her first husband a Stretchley — 
which may indicate a reason for Henry Champer- 
noune looking after the interests of Mary Stretchley 
the widow of Richard Seymour, son of William 
Seymour, and grandson of Elizabeth daughter of 
Sir Arthur Campernoune of Dartington Esq. 

And again the Elizabeth (Seymour) Cary, whose 
declaration is here quoted, was sister to William 
Seymour, father of this Richard Seymour, and her 
second son Robert Cary, married for his first wife 
Christin daughter and heir of William Stretchly 
esq. — Westcote's " Devonshire" page 511. 

The other will was made July 29, 1655, eighteen 
years after. Richard Seymour of Norwalk, Con- 
necticut saying : 

" I doe will and bequeath unto my loving wife, 
Mercy Seymour, my whole estate, viz. House and 
lands, cattle and movables, except small personal 
value of property to Thomas &c." 

He gives, on reaching twenty-one, the sum of 
forty pounds to John, to Zachary and Richard, but 
the control was in the mother. 

From my earliest childhood tales of ancestral 



greatness were inculcated, wliich in the unques- 
tioning credulity of youth, were accepted without 
asking for proof of such traditions. 

We were taught to believe that the wife of 
Richard Seymour was Mary or Mercy Rashleigh, 
and that the marriage was recorded at Barnstaple 
in the north of County Devon, but the date we 
knew not. I have photographs, reversed in print- 
ing, of two rings, which have been handed down 
in the family of Richard Seymour's son, John of 
Hartford. Some years ago another descendant had 
duplicates made for his own keeping. The silver- 
smith who did the making said, that the Naval 
Officer's ring was not less than two hundred years 
old. 

The Rashleighs were anciently naval men, two 
of the family circumnavigating the globe with Sir 
Francis Drake. 

There were also Naval Officers in 'the Seymour 
family. 

John — the second son of Sir Edward Se3anour, 
and who married Elizabeth Slannynge of Tam- 
nierton Folliet, Oct. 25, 1629 (possibly as second 
wife as he must have been about forty years 
old) — was in 1626 in the fleet as Captain of the 
ship " Camelion." Also "in 1627 April i''-3'^ 
' Plymouth.' Sir Edward Se3anour desires that his 
brother Capt. John Seymour, ma}^ have a Good 
Ship in the present expedition." And several 
years later records show his connection with the 
navy. 




SEYMOUR ARMS AND RASHLEIGH ARMS COMBINED. 




RING-ACCORDS WITH RASHLEIGH ARMS. 




THE NAVAL RING. 



— 7— 

But these suffice. 

The other ring accords with " The Rashleigh 
Arms." I will give from the " Visitation of Corn- 
wall," 1620, vol. 9, page 306, " Rashleigh-Quar- 
terly sa- a cross or. between a Cornish chough Ar. 
beaked and legged gu. i'^ quarter; in the 2'^ quar- 
ter a text T. of the third 3'^ & 4*^ a crescent of the 
last, on the cross a rose." 

Lyson's Magna Bretannia, Devonshire, vol. vi, 
page clxix, " Rashleigh of Rashleigh Arms." "Ar. 
a cross, sa. in chief, two text T* of the second." 

Can there be question about placing Richard 
Seymour's wife with the Rashleighs ? 

Thomas Rashleigh, " a study ent," no doubt 
meaning in theology, was May 8th, 1640, admitted 
to the church in Boston, and we learn from Lech- 
ford that in 1641 he exercised in a prophetical way 
in Gloucester, and there perhaps married, but his 
son " John, being six weeks old, was baptized at 
Boston, May i8th, 1645." 

Savage's Gen. Diet., vol. iii, page 508, says he 
was at Exeter in 1646. 

Thomas Rashleigh's coming to New England 
was near or quite the same time that Richard Sey- 
mour came, although he remained at or near Bos- 
ton, while Richard Seymour located in Hartford. 
If he w^as a relative of Mercy (or Marey), wife of 
Richard Seymour, the influence of the mother of 
six weeks' old John, who returned with them to 
England, might have been a chain to keep him in 
that locality until the confusion of civil war had 



— 8— 

subsided, when he returned to England, and was 
the minister at Bishop-stoke, County Hants, where 
Ma}^ 4th, 1652, he baptized Samuel Sewell, first of 
that name Chief Justice of Massachusetts, and who 
was made immortal by his wife's dowry of Pine 
Tree shillings. 

The relationship of Thomas and Mercy Rash- 
leigh is conjecture, but family tradition, and the 
presence of the " Rashleigh Arms " in family 
relics and treasures, is unquestioned, and they 
came not there by accident. 

I have an impression in wax of the '* Seymour 
Arms," i. e. " The Wings," above which is the 
Cornish chough, no longer in flight, but resting 
with the Rashleigh rose in its beak, showing it 
had found a home in connection with the " Seymour 
Arms." 

What was the influence which moved Richard 
Seymour to emigrate in 1639/40 to New England ? 

The laws of entailment giving to the eldest son 
from generation to generation the estates. The 
Church, the sea or a military life was the vocation 
left to younger sons, who had too much spirit to 
remain a dependant upon that elder and more 
fortunate relative. 

Although a brother might not experience the 
gall of dependence in sharing what was his father's, 
the same exemption could hardly extend to the 
other members of his family. 

Let us look back, that we may understand what 
the position of two brothers might be, both inherit- 



ing the same blood and spirit of their common 
ancestors ; the accident of a few minutes, months 
or years earlier birth entailing control to the 
favored one. 

Sir Edward Seymour, Viscount Beauchamp, Earl 
of Hertford, and later Baron Seymour, of Hache, 
and Duke of Somerset, in 1537 repudiated his first 
wife, Lady Catherine Filliol, daughter and heir of 
Sir William Filliol, of Woodlands, County Dorset, 
and Filliol-Hall in Essex, that he might take to 
wife Lady Anne Stanhope, daughter of Thomas 
Woodstock, Duke of Gloucester, seventh and 
youngest son of King Edward III. 

Lady Catherine had then been twelve years his 
wife, and had two sons, John and Edward, about 
ten and eleven years old. 

In more than one respect, this second marriage, 
and its results, were not unlike that of a certain 
Emperor of the French. 

On many thrones of Europe to-day are seated 
the descendants of repudiated Josephine, through 
her son Eugene Beauhamais. 

The ducal honors of Somerset were occupied but 
a short period by the descendants of Lady Anne 
Stanhope : ninety years after the attainder of the 
first duke was removed, her male line became 
extinct, and the honors in 1750 reverted to the 
elder branch, the line of Lady Catherine Filliol, 
ancestress of the present duke. 

Hay ward says in his life of King Edward VI, 
" Anne Stanhope, Duchess of Somerset, was for 



pride monstrous, a woman for many imperfections 
intolerable, she was exceeding violent, and subtle 
in accomplishing her ends, for which she spurned 
all respect of conscience and shame. 

This woman did bear such invincible hate to 
the Queen Dowager, first, for slight causes and 
woman's quarrels, and especially because she, 
(Queen Catherine) had precedence over her, the 
wife of the greatest Peer in the land." 

Referring to Lord Sudeley's disaffection, subtle 
intrigues and underhanded practices of providing 
arms and enlisting men, with design of seizing the 
King and assuming the reins of government him- 
self, Collins in " Peerage of England " says : " The 
animosity was fomented by Anne Duchess of Som- 
ersets being obliged to 3deld precedence to the wife 
of her husbands younger brother." 

The earl, for at this time his title was Karl of 
Hertford, having become brother-in-law to one 
King and uncle to his successor (his sister. Lady 
Jane Se^-mour, being the wife of King Henry YIII 
and mother of his only son. King Edward VI)j his 
ambition overcame his better sense, and hastened 
calamitous results. ''"'' '''' '"'' ''' '''' 

Why were the Seymour's at Berry Pomeroy ? 

Lyson in his " Magna Britannia " says : " Berry 
Pomeroy came into possession of the Seymour's by 
purchase from the Crown." 

At that time the old castle was simply a strong- 
hold, where many warriors could be fed and en- 
camped. It. was Catherine Fillol's grandson who 



— II- 



built the Elizabethan Palace, after he had married 
Elizabeth Champernoune, as I will mention later, 
and which was the residence of the Seymours until 
brought to destruction by civil war, then the family 
removed to Mayden Bradley. 

Sir Thomas Pomeroy, the last of that family at 
Berry Pomeroy in 1549, was a Catholic, and one of 
the leaders in a rebellion which assumed serious 
proportions, having mustered ten thousand men, 
who demanded that mass be restored, which riot 
was put down by Lord Russell, the leaders sent to 
London, where they were tried, and many executed, 
their forfeited estates reverting to the Crown. 

At that time, in 1549, according to Lyson, the 
Duke of Somerset was in the Tower of London, 
having been arrested on charge of treason, but after 
five months imprisonment was acquitted, although 
less than three years after was found guilty of 
felony and beheaded. 

About 1550 the Duke purchased Berry-Pomeroy 
and bestowed it upon the children of his first wife, 
perhaps that they be as far as practicable removed 
from his second wife and her family. Or it might 
have resulted from admiration of his elder son 
Edward, who Sept. loth, 1547, was with his father 
in the " Battle of Musselbourgh " and for valor there, 
having had his horse killed under him, received the 
order of knio^hthood. 

Be that as it may, from that time the home of 
the elder branch was at Berry-Pomeroy. 

John the eldest son, by his last will, dated Dec. 



■12- 



ytli, 1552, after bequeathing legacies to his servants, 
concludes in these words : " also I make my Brother, 
Sir Edward Seymour the elder, my full executor 
and I give him all my lands and goods that are 
unbequeathed. He to paie and discharge all my 
debts." 

The probate bears date April 26th, 1553. 

Sir Bdward Seymour, Knt., of Berry Pomeroy, 
County of Devon, obtained in the 7th year of King 
Edward VI (i. e. 1553) an act of Parliament restor- 
ing him in blood, to enable him to enjoy lands that 
might subsequently come to him from au}^ collateral 
ancestor, and describing him as Edward Seymour, 
the eldest son of Edward, first Duke of Somerset, 
John the first son having died early in that year 

(i-e. 1553)- 

He had a grant from the King dated at Ely Sept. 

6th, 1553, "of the Lordships and manors of Wal- 
ton, Shedder and Stowey, the Park of Stowc}-, and 
the hundred of Water-stock, in Count}^ Somerset, 
with the appurtenances, to him and his heirs for- 
ever, lately the possessions of his Father, Edward 
Duke of Somerset." 

From his father's death to that time there had 
been no provision made for him. He lived retired 
without concern in public affairs, excepting being 
Sheriff of the County of Devon and other offices 
suiting his degree. He married Alary Walsh, 
daughter and heiress of John W^alsh, Esq., Justice 
of the Common Pleas, &c. 

He died I\Iay 6th, 1593, as is evident from the 



—13— 

inquisition taken after his death, at Totness on 
September 20th, 1593, wherein he has the titles of 
Knight and Lord Seymour, and died seized of the 
castle and honor of Bury, and Bury-Pomeroy and 
Bridgetown in Pomeroy, with the advowson of the 
church at Bury : the castle and honor of Totness 
and manor of Totness ; the manors of Cornworthy, 
Lodeswell, Huise, Monnockenzeale, Losebear, a 
fourth part of the hundred of Hayborre, the seite 
of the monastery of Torr, and divers other lands 
of Devonshire ; the manor and Lordship of Mayden- 
Bradley in County Wilts, and divers other lands, 
and a capital messuage called the Lord Chayne 
House in London, within the precincts of Black- 
friars, near Ludgate. To all of which his son 
Edward was heir, and at that time upwards of thirty 
years of age. 

Which Hdward Seymour, while his father was 
yet living in 1592, was chosen one of the Knights 
for County Devon. Also returned to Parliament 
in 1600, and to the first Parliament of King James. 

He was made Baronet June 29th, 161 1. Sept. 
30th, 1576, he married at Dartington Elizabeth 
Champernoune, daughter of Sir Arthur Champer- 
noune of Dartington, County of Devon, Knight, 
a lady whose lineage, being a descendant of Lady 
Elizabeth Plantagenet, daughter of Eleanor of 
Castile and King Edward I, was fully equal to that 
of Lady Stanhope, for whom the first Duke of 
vSomerset repudiated Lady Catharine Filliol, her 
husband's grandmother. 



—14— 

They had eleven children. This Sir Edward 
commenced the dwelling honse within the quad- 
rangle of the Castle of Berry-Pomeroy, with its 
grand staircase, fine fret-work and mullioned win- 
dows, of which it is recorded there were so many 
" that it was a good day's work for a servant to 
open and close the casements," the cost of which 
exceeded twenty thousand pounds ($100,000.00). 
All is now buried in its own ruin. 

Collins in "Peerage of England," page 171, 
sa3'^s : " This castle at Berry was a great and noble 
structure, but in those times of confusion during 
the Civil Wars in the reign of Charles I was 
demolished and now lies in ruin." 

Also at the bottom of page 172 and top of page 
173 says: "For adhering to his Sovereign in the 
times of the Rebellion, he had his house at Berry 
Castle in Devon plundered and burnt." 

[This, recorded by Collins, relates to events 
which occurred after the death of this Sir Edward, 
but during the life of his son and successor. It is 
inserted here as connected with the fate of Berry 
Castle, its construction and destruction.] 

Sir Edward (Lord Seymour) died April nth, 
1613, and was buried with great solemnity in the 
church at Berry-Pomeroy, where he has a noble 
monument. Sir Edward Seymour, the eldest son, 
succeeding him in titles and estates. 

May 2 2d, 1603, ten years before the death of his 
father, he had been knighted at Greenwich. 

He was sent by King James I on an embassy to 



—15— 

Denmark, was elected one of the Knights of Devon- 
shire in two Parliaments, and for Killington and 
Totness in two other Parliaments. Also by the 
appointment of Charles I in the last, which met in 
Westminster. 

But on the dissolution thereof he retired to the 
Castle of Berry-Pomero}^, which had been made a 
stately House. He had by Dorothy, his lady, 
daughter of Sir Henry Killigrew, of Lathbury, in 
Cornwall, Knight, six sons and five daughters. 

He died October 5th, 1659. ^ 

Hoare says, Lady Dorothy Seymour, his wife, 
was buried at Berry-Pomeroy, June 30th, 1643. 
"^ I will now follow with the other children of Sir 
Edward and Elizabeth (Champemoune) Seymour, 
who were married at Dartington, County Devon, 
Sept. 30th, 1576. 

Bridget was baptized at Dartington, Dec. ist, 
1577. She married Sir John Bruen, of Aldehamps- 
ton, and was buried at Aldehampston. 

Mar3Mvas born 1579. Married Sir George Fare- 
well, of Hill Bishop, County Somerset, Knight. 

Edward, first son, married about 1604, Dorothy, 
daughter of Sir Henr}^ Killigrew, of Lathbury- 
Cornwall, Knight (before narrated). Their daugh- 
ter Elizabeth, supposed to be the eldest daughter, 
was baptized May 2 2d, 1606. 

John, second son (so recorded in Mill's Pedigrees 
of Devonshire families, 1753), married Oct. 25th, 
1629, Elizabeth Slannyng, sister of Richard and 
Nicholas Slannyng, of Tammerton Folliet (perhaps 
as second wife). Marriage license at Exeter. 



— 16— 

Hoare's History of Wiltsliire says lie died at 
Halwell, Archdeaconry of Totness, in 1670. 

He was certainly living in 1639, and even in 
1650, for at that time, John Seymour, of Stoken- 
liam, Count}' Devon, Esq., was delinquent, as he 
adhered to the forces raised against the Parlia- 
ment. 

He petitioned, May 30th, 1649, stating he had 
property in Halwell, Devon, on which he was fined 
at a sixth viz. ^105. 

August i6th, 1626 — "York House" " Bucking- 
ham to Commissioners of Navy — Capt. John Se_v- 
mour having been employed in the late fleet as 
Captain of the " Camelion " is recommended for 
payment, after the rate of 2'' & 6*^ per diem." 

April ist-3d, 1627 " Plymouth " — Sir James 
Bagg to Nicholas. Further enforces the points in 
his letter to the Duke. 

Sir Edward Seymour begs that his brother Capt. 
John Seymour msiy have a good ship in the present 
expedition. 

1638/39 " Certificate b}'- John Seymour Lieuten- 
ant Colonel of Sir Edward Seymour's Regiment " 
" That Thomas Serle of Burferris, County Devon, 
cited before the Council for not providing arms at 
the last muster, together with his son-in-law John 
Pyne Clerk, had accorded to provide what arms 
should be impossed on them, for their tenement in 
Tamerton Folliet. 

January 19th, 1639, " Tamerton — Certificate of 
John Se3anour Deputy Lieutenant of Devon, that 



-17- 



Henry Pollexseii, William Cliolwick, Allen Belfield 
and Richard Lapp, all of County Devon, had prom- 
ised to find such arms as should be enjoined them." 
(And others of succeeding dates.) Communicated 
by Rev. F. G. Lee, Vicar of All Saints, Lambeth, 
transmitted by the Hon. Henry W. Seymour of 
Washington, D. C. " Miscellanea Genealogica et 
Heraldiare," vol. iii, page 373. New series 1880, 
by J, J. Howard. No. 11, Pedigree of Withey of 
Berry-Norbet and Westminster. 

Mary, daughter of John Seymour of Berry-Pom- 
ero}'-, and niece of Sir Bdward Seymour of that 
house, married Robert Withey of Berry-Norbet, 
who died in 1669, and was buried at St. Mary's, 
Westminster. 

William, the third son, married June 8th, 1602, 
Joan, daughter of John Young of Saltash, Corn- 
wall. 

From the burial register of Plympton St. Mary 
is this entry, " Masf William Seamer Gent, of the 
House of Bearie-Castle, in the pyshe of Berie 
Pomrie, was buried in ye Pyche Church of Plymton 
Erie, the xxx day of Jannarie 162 1." He evidently 
lived at Plympton. 

Col. Vivian, in his " Histor}^ or Visitation of 
Devon," states that William, the third son of Sir 
Bdward Seymour, had a son Richard, who married 
Mary Stretchley at Plympton St. Mary, May 20th, 
1626. (See marriage register.) The licence was 
granted May 5, 1626. 

He was buried August, 1637. ^^^^Y ^^^ three 



K 



— 18— 

« 

daughters, Amy, Bridget and Anne, and a son, 
Richard, who died unmarried, and was buried at 
Cockington August 26th, 1684. 

Declaration of Elizabeth (Seymour) Cary, wife 
of George Cary of Cockington, Devon, dated Jan- 
uary 19th, 1638, states that Mr. Richard Seymour's 
inventory was taken by Henry Chanipernoune of 
Dartington Esq. (allied by blood to both Seymour 
and Stretchley) , Nicholas Ball of Tormohan, mer- 
chant, and another. 

Elizabeth, third daughter of Sir Edward and 
Elizabeth (Chanipernoune) Seymour, married Sir 
George Cary of Cockington, in County Devon, 
Esq. Sir George Gary's will proven May 2 2d, 161 7. 

" Mathew Hatch made declaration that Elizabeth 
Cary, the relict of George Cary of Cockington, and 
mother of Henry Cary of Cockington, in Devon, 
Knight, and sometimes called Elizabeth Seymour, 
also mother of Robert (of whom Westcote's Devon- 
shire, page 511, states, married Christin, daughter 
and heir of W" Stretchley, Esq.) also mother of 
Edward, John, Theodore, George, Walter and 
James, sons, and Frances, Elizabeth and Bridget, 
daughters of the above George and Elizabeth, were 
all living and in good health." 

This is dated June 15th, 1646. 

Ann married Edmund Parker of North Moulton, 
in County Devon, Esq. 

There were two children, who died in infancy. 

Waller, the fourth son. Collins, in '* Peerage of 
England," names him as fourth son. Also Hoare's 
*' History of Wiltshire " j^laces him as fourth son. I 



—19— 

Hon. Henry W. Seymour of Washington, D. C, 
sends the following: 

" Historical Manuscripts Commission, ist Report, 
Appendix, part vii." 

Manuscripts of Duke of Somerset. 

IMarquis of Ailesbury and Rev. Sir T. H. G. 
Paleston, Bart., page 58. "Walter Seymour to Philip 
Richards at Maiden - Bradley, 1607, Oct. i9tli, 
entreats him to further his request as necessity 
enforces, for 10^ this quarter." " You know 
against Christmas I shall have more occasion to 

bestow money than at any other time 

I am so much indebted as my exhibition will not 
extend so far as to pay it. Wherefore I thought 
it better to once again trouble you, than to be in- 
debted to the merchants. 

The matter is not great, I must confess, but yet 
I would not willingly have any left unpaid, which 
would be a great discredit. 

My father sent me word he would increase my 
exhibition when I proceeded Bachelor. Wherefore 
I am sure he will not deny so small a sum in the 
meantime. 

Postscript — If you have an intent to send your 
son unto Oxford, either before Christmas or imme- 
diately after, I can easily provide him a place." 

Date of the above is Oct. 19th, 1607. 

One year later — " Oxf. Hist. Soc, vol. xii, page 
281." 

" Seymour — Walter, B.A., from Exeter College, 
26th Oct. 1608. 



-20 — 



'' Seymour — Walter, M.A. 4tli June, 1611." 

Degrees. 

From tlie ]\ISS. in tlie Bodleian Library, Oxford, 
M.S. Top. Devon. C. 14, p. 212. 

Bxeter: Seymour-Walter; adm. B.A. 26 Oct., 
160S, det. 1608/9: lie. M.iV. 4 June, 161 1, inc. 161 1. 

The monument in Berry-Pomeroy Cliurch shows 
five sons of mature age, four daughters and also 
two infants. 

Westcote's " Devonshire " says : "In the north 
aisle of St. j\Iary, Parish Church of Berry-Pomeroy, 
is a noble monument erected to the memory of the 
Seymours," underneath which are cut out in stone 
the proportions of their eleven children. 

It would seem from this that Edward, John, 
William, Walter and Richard were men of mature 
age, but of Walter's marriage or death I know of 
no record except a legend that he perished in one 
of the Parliamentary battles, of which we have no 
proof. 

"""" Richard, the fifth or youngest son, was born in 
1596, as the records at Exeter College, Oxford, 
" founded in 13 14 by Walter D. Stapleton, Bishop 
of Exeter j" state : " Seymour-Richard, of Devon 
Bart. fil. Exeter Coll., matriculated 5 Feb. 1613 
aged 17 years fifth son of Sir Edward Seymour." 

Also Register of Exeter College, Oxford, edited 
by C. W. Boase ; Oxf Hist. Soc. xxvii, page 279. 

College Plate^ 
White plate ; Card pots. 

" Exdono Richardi Seymour, hujus collegii 




MONUMENT IN BERRY-POM EROY CHURCH, 



— 21- 



commensalis et fillii Bdwardi Seymour, Baronetti, 
143/4 oz." 

After this gift of plate (14 3/4 oz.) wlien lie was 
recorded as Richard Seymour son of Edward Sey- 
mour Baronet, (not as son of the late Baronet) it 
would make it seem to have been soon after his 
matriculation, as his father died early that year 
(i. e. April nth, 1613) after which we find no later 
record of him at Oxford. 
~We have no evidence that he graduated. 

Collins, before 17 14, states, Richard, fifth son of 

Sir Edward Seymour, married Miss Rash- 

leigh. 

Hoare's History of Wiltshire states, " Richard, 
fifth son of Sir Edward Seymour, was born in 1596, 
as the Records at Exeter College indicate, but do 
not show that he graduated." 

From what I can learn : — 

Bridget was baptized December ist, 1577. 

Mar}^ born 1579. 

Elizabeth was living in 1646. 

Edward died October 5th, 1659. 

William died January 30th, 162 1. 

John died 1670. 

Ann married Edmund Parker. 

Walter 

Richard was born in 1596. 

And our ancestor, Richard Seymour, died in 
1655 — between July 29th, 1655 and Oct. 25th, 1655. 

As I have enumerated, the Seymour estates were 
many. 



— 22- 



CoUius says that at that time the Seymours were 
the most powerful famil}^, of largest fortune and 
extensive influence of any of the commons in the 
west of Bngland. fv 

The eldest son, and inheritor of these estates, 
had five daughters and six sons, now arrived at 
mature years. Collins says the eldest son, born in 
1610, was Vice Admiral of the County of Devon, 
taking an active part in the army. 

The second son, Henry, born in 16 12, was Page 
of Honor to his Majest}' Charles I, and was a gen- 
tleman valued and esteemed by persons of the 
greatest note, and on the eruption of the civil w^ars, 
went with the Marquis of Hertford into Somerset- 
shire, etc., courageously withstanding the whole 
force of the Karl of Bedford, etc. 

The country was now in the throes of civil war, 
the head of the house supporting the cause of his 
sovereign. Charles first began his reign March 
27th, 1625, governing without Parliament from 
1629 to 1640, meeting, the expenses of the govern- 
ment by forced loans and other extraordinary 
means. 

He was executed at Whitehall January 30th, 
1649. 

Unless Richard Seymour's S3^mpathies were in 
concord with his influential relatives, what could 
be better than that he seek a home in the new 
country, where many friends had preceded ? 

The Seymours being strong adherents of the 
Established Church, suffered alike from the Cath- 
olics and Presbyterians. 



—23— 

St. Mary, the parish church of Berry-Pomeroy, 
was plundered of its monumental brasses and 
burned, its register destroyed, and although the 
edifice has been restored, there is no register ante- 
dating 1602. 

As the Seymours at that date had been located 
there over fifty years, it is to their serious disad- 
vantage, that being one reason why it is so difficult 
to prove the date of marriages, baptisms, and 
burials, previous to 1602. **" 

The probating of wills at Totness, Bodmin and 
Bxeter assist, but minors and people without 
estates do not always make wills ; children offend- 
ing by objectionable alliances are not always men- 
tioned in a will. As a consequence if the church 
records of marriages, baptisms and burials are lost, 
^_,jt is an irreparable injury. 
I - In the wars between Charles I and Parliament, 
Sir Edward Seymour, the head of the house, for 
his adherence to his sovereign, and supporting 
episcopacy, endured many hardships. 

His beautiful Elizabethan dwelling within the 
quadrangle of the Castle at Berry-Pomeroy was 
plundered and burned, and now lies a ruin. Not 
only was the castle and palace destroyed, but its 
records perished, and that to the descendants seems 
the greater loss, for in the muniment-room (about 
nine feet in width and eleven feet long, leading by 
a few stairs from the guard-room), where were 
kept the castle-record of births, with names of their 
sponsors, of marriages, by whom bestowed, amount 



—24— 

of dower or marriage portion, deaths, and wlio 
were the chief mourners ; of charters, seals, deeds, 
copies of wills, and events of importance, all there, 
from generation to generation, and cannot be 
replaced. _^ 

In 1639/40 there was no prospect of the elder 
branch of the family inheriting the ducal honors 
and dignities, therefore but little use in a new 
country of ancestral parade ''' * ''' '^. 

Why was the tradition, which has come down 
through these years, that Richard Seymour was of 
the family of the Earl of Hertford instead of the 
Somersets ? 

Let me answer. The attainder of the first Duke 
of Somerset was not removed until 1660, twenty 
years after Richard Seymour came to Connecticut, 
five years after he was laid to his final rest in the 
old Colonial Cemetery at Norwalk. 

Elizabeth, in the first year of her reign, before 
her coronation (1558), created Edward, the eldest 
son of Lady Anne Stanhope, Earl of Hertford and 
Baron Beaucliamp,which were honors enjoyed by his 
father before he was made Duke of Somerset, and 
for which titles and honors a private act was passed 
May 25th, 1540, "whereby all titles and honors 
were specially entailed on the issue of his second 
marriage." 

When Richard Seymour came to New England 
and during the remainder of his life, the head of 
the house of Seymour was the Earl of Hertford. 

The natural sequence, particularly at the time of 






—25— 

burial, would be for companions and friendvS to refer 
to him as of the family of the Earl of Hertford, 

Think you such reference would not sink into 
the memories of sons lo, 12 and 14 years of age? 
When connected with a father who was dead, even 
if Thomas, who had been married one year and 
ten months when his father, Richard Seymour, died, 
did not choose to comment, would they not repeat 
it from father to child, and thus bring it down 
through the j^ears ? 

What have we to sustain the tradition of our 
grandsires, that Richard Seymour descended from 
a Knight, who taking the name of St. Maur from 
the place of his birth in Normandy, as was an 
ancient custom, entered England with William the 
Conqueror, and assisted in establishing his claim 
over those of Harold, as successor to " Edward the 
Confessor," and in the battle of Senlac, otherwise 
known as Hastings, overthrew Harold. 

The family of St. Maur were early located in 
Monmouthshire, as the learned Camden and other 
genealogists agree. The name was anciently writ- 
ten St. Maur, and in old Latin records D. S. Mauro. 

For Camden says : " Roger dd St. Mauro lived 
in the reign of Henry I (i. e. iioo). Almerius de 
vSt. Tvlauro was Master of the order of Knight Tem- 
plars, and Alilo de St. Maur was one of the Barons 
of the realm, in the reign of King John (i. e., 11 79) 
as his descendants were, till the reign of Henry 

V"(i4i3.\ 

The earliest and most certain information con- 



—26— 

cerning the family and the place of their residence, 
Camden gives in his " Britannia in Alonmouth- 
shire " in these words : " Not far from Caldicot are 
Wonndy and Penhow, the seats formerly of the 
illustrious family of St. Maur, now corruptly called 
Seymour. 

We find that about the year 1240, in order to 
wrest Wound}' out of the hands of the Welsh, 
Gilbert Alarshall, Earl of Pembroke, was obliged 
to assist William of St. Maur Knt. from whom was 
descended Roger of St. Maur, Knight, who married 
one of the heiresses of the illustrious John Beau- 
champ, the noble Baron of Hache, who was de- 
scended from Sibyl, one of the co-heiresses of the 
most puissant William Marshall, Earl of Pembroke, 
and from William Ferrars, Earl of Derb3^ Hugh de 
Vivonia and William JMallet, men of eminent worth 
in their time. 

The nobility of all which, as also several others, 
have concentred in the Right Honorable Edward de 
St. Maur, or Seimer, now Earl of Hertford, a 
singular encourager of vertue and learning, for 
which qualification he is deservedly famous." 

From Camden's " Britannia in Monmouthshire," 
column 2, page 597, by William Camden Clar- 
enceaux, who died in 1623, aged 73 : " This book 
was newly translated into English with additions 
and improvements. London, 1695." 

From Collins' "Peerage of England": "Sir 
Roger de St. Mauro was son and heir of Sir Will- 
iam de St. IVIaur (for Vincent assures us that he 
was a knight). 



—27— 

The church of Penhow was dedicated to St. 
Maur. The Park was called by their name, and 
likewise here at Penhow they had their castle, 
which continued in the family until the time of 
Henry VIII, for in a letter of the Earl of Hertford 
to Sir John Thynne (whose grandmother was a 
Seymour, and the family bore the ' Seymour 
arms,' she inheriting Penhow), and Roger St. Maur 
having married Cecelia, one of the daughters and 
heiresses of John Beauchamp, Baron of Hache, etc., 
in County Somerset, added to his fortunes as well 
as the dignity of his family, and this was the cause 
of their removal into Somersetshire to their very 
great advantage." 

The Earl of Hertford asked of Sir John Thynne 
" To be informed to whom his grandfather had 
sold Sejanour castle in Wales ?" 

Sir Roger de St. Mauro was lord of the manor 
of Woundy in the time of Henry III (1216) and a 
grant to Thomas Elliot of a messuage of the chapel 
at Woundy ; his seal appendant was a pair of wings 
circumscribed " Sigill Rogeri de Seimer." This Sir 
Roger died before the 28th year of King Edward I 
(i. e. 1299). I have a copy of these arms, taken 
from a window of the old church at Penhow. 

A genealogist who has made a study of this, 
suggests that the name '' Penhow," may be an 
outcome of the St. Maur coat of arms, as " Penna " 
means " wing." 

When Richard Seymour came to New England 
in 1639/40, he brought some things which verify 



—28— 

traditions. Anciently bnt a small proportion of 
the people could write their names, even if they 
could read. Therefore, from early times every 
family had as sign-manual a " coat of arms, or 
" seal," to be used by way of authentication or 
security. 

The " seal" which Richard Seymour brought 
with him to New England, which he used, as well 
as did his immediate successors, on wills and busi- 
ness papers, is still in the keeping of one branch 
of the famil}^ of Richard's son, John Sej^mour of 
Hartford, and is identical with that used six hun- 
dred years ago by Sir Roger Seimer of *' Penhow " 
in Monmouthshire. 

■ I have a photograph of an impression from that 
seal. 

The seal was used on a will in 1765, in 1798 and 
again in 1829. 

An excerpt from the will of Thomas Seymour, 
on which that seal was used, dated Dec. 2Sth, 1798 : 

Item — "As I have already given to my eldest 
son Thomas Y. Seymour by deed of gift and other- 
wise, his full portion of my estate, in which he ex- 
presses himself contented, so I give him nothing 
further, except ' my silver seal,' bearing the Family 
Arms, which was his grandfather Seymour's." 

Which arms are the " St. Maxir wings, tips 
downwards conjoined in lure" — the same as gener- 
ation after generation have used for seven hundred 
3^ears. 

I have a photograph of a coat of arms which was 
brought from England. 




THE SEAL— THE SAME AS USED AT PENHOW IN 1393. 



I 



— 2Ch- 

Tlie original is in the keeping of a descendant 
of Ricliard Seymour's second son John. It is prop- 
erly colored, which does not make itself evident in 
a photograph. 

Underneath the " coat of arms " is " He beareth 
Gules, a pair of wings inverted and conjoyned 
Or," by the name of Seymour. 

This is a copy of the original formerly belong- 
ing to Henry Seymour, son of Thomas (1735), 
the first mayor of Hartford, which Thomas had 
the original ; it is now in New Orleans, but still 
in the possession of a descendant of John Sey- 
mour, the son of Richard. 

I have referred to the two rings which are pre- 
served by descendants of John Seymour, who must 
have clothed these several relics of bygone days 
with a degree of sacredness, or they would not be 
in evidence to-day. 

One ring is the ring of a naval of&cer. Was it 
Seymour ? or was it Rashleigh ? 

The other ring accords with the Rashleigh arms, 
and admits of no doubt but that it was once the 
ring of Richard Seymour's wife. 

Charles J. Seymour, a descendant of John, second 
son of Richard Seymour, now past middle age and 
living near Boston, has in his possession by inher- 
itance a Bishop's Bible, black letter, edition 1584, 
which he guards with devotion. 

It is in the vault of a bank, and the credentials 
of any one requesting sight of it must be without 
spot or blemish. I have not seen the Bible, but a 



— 30— 

friend, a descendant of John, son of Richard Sey- 
mour, has had a careful examination of it, and sa3^s : 
*' I believe the Bible published in 1584 was inher- 
ited by John, the second son of Richard Seymour, 
and that Richard was in Hartford in 1640, as the 
Bible states." 

The minute statement, " Richard Seymor of 
Bery-Pomery, Heytor hund. in ye Com. Devon, 
His Booke " indicates that Bery-Pomery was his 
birthplace or residence, and that the Bible was his 
book. 

In the inventory of the estate of his son John 
of Hartford, we find 2. great Bible 10 shillings. 

That a man who had matriculated at an Oxford 
College should, when in his sixtieth year and near 
death, sign his will with his mark, indicates physi- 
cal weakness, and that he did not mention this 
Bible in that will, cannot count against its having 
belonged to Richard Seymour, for with the excep- 
tion of a few specified articles to his son Thomas, 
all else was given to his loving wife as well as care 
of his three sons under age, who, at the age of 
twenty-one years were each to receive forty pounds. 

In the inventory of Richard Seymour's estate, 
appraised by Matthew Campfield and Richard Olm- 
stead, we find : Item — Books^ one pounds which, 
without doubt, included this Bible. 

[In the inventory of his son John's estate we 
find — one Great Bible^ 10 sJiillings^ 

From this Bible — I have three photographs : on 
the reverse of the title page is a pen and ink 




SEYMOUR COAT OF ARMS, 



With Augmentations granted by Henry VIII in 1536. 



i 



—31— 

sketcli of the " Seymour coat of arms," as used 
by the Karl of Hertford, with the augmentations 
granted by Henry VHI in 1536 to the family of 
Jane Seymour, his third wife. 

J. Howard, in his " Peerage and Family History," 
on page 40, referring to the augmentations granted 
to Howard, after the victory at Flodden, and death 
on the field of the King of Scots, says : "The dif- 
ference between a grant to a man and his heirs 
and a grant to all his race, is well seen in the case 
of the Seymour augmentations, (August 15th, 
1547), which was granted not only to the Duke of 
Somerset and his heirs, but also * Omnibus posteris 
suis totique familie.' " 

Which coat of arms and augmentations were — 
Quarterly, ist and 4th between six fleur-de-lis, 
three lions of England, 2d and 3d. . The paternal 
coat of Seymour, i. e. " two wings conjoined in 
lure, tips downward," " crest," " a Phoenix in flames 
with wings expanded." Which crest was a badge 
in memory of King Edward VI, as it was on the 
banner carried by his grandfather, Sir John Sey- 
mour, the father of Queen Jane Seymour, in the 
wars in France and Flanders; also in 1520, when 
he attended King Henry VIH at the great inter- 
view with Francis the French King, called the 
" Field of the Cloth of Gold," having in his retinue 
one chaplain, eleven servants and eight led horses. 

Also at the second interview at Boulogne in 1532. 



—32— 
Beneath this Coat of Arms is this device 

' ' Foy pour devoir ' ' 

RICHARD SEYMOR OF BERY POMERY 
HEYTOR HUND. IN Y* COM DEVON 

hi/ Booke. 



Hartford y'' Collony of Connecticot 

in Newe England Annoque Domini 

1640 

The second photograph is the title-page to the 
New Testament of a Bishop's Bible, black letter 
edition 1584. At the bottom of this page, in a 
panel, is a pen and ink sketch of the Seymour 
arms, i. e. " the wings conjoined in lure, tips down- 
wards." The same as were used by the D. St. 
Mauro at Penhow in 1393, and always in the 
Somerset quarterings. 

G. W. Eve in " Decorative Heraldry," page 37, 
says : " The ' Phoenix ' was the Banner of Sir 
John Semer in the sixteenth century," and " the 
colors of his standard were Azure with the Back 
of the Wings Or." 

The original " crest " was on a wreath, a " pair 
of wnngs conjoined and crowned." 

The third photograph is the first chapter of 
Matthew in this Bishop's Bible, black letter, edition 

1584. 

In the inventory of John Se3^mour's estate 



—33— 

(second son of Richard) is " a Great Bible, lo shil- 
lings." The will was dated Dec. loth, 1712. 

If Richard Seymour's home had not been at 
Berry Pomeroy before he came to New England, 
would this Bible with this record have been left to 
stand without explanation ? 

Did not the sons of Richard know the truth from 
their parents' lips ? and Thomas must have been 
at least seven years old when he left England, and 
would have disabused their minds if not correct. 

Knowing the truth, they would never have 
assumed that to which they were not entitled, for 
they were men of honor. 

Maria Watson Pinney, 

No. 116 Derby Avenue, 

Derby, Conn. 



In the first place I wish to acknowledge the great 
assistance of the Hon. Henry W. Seymour of 
Washington, D. C, without which this narrative of 
connected incidents could never have appeared. 

Also to the courtesy and assistance of Mr. Chas. 
Iv. N. Camp of New Haven I am greatly indebted. 

Authorities used are : 

Camden's " Britannia in Monmouthshire." 
Ly son's Magna Britannia, Devonshire. 
Col. Vivian's Visitation of Devonshire. 
Westcote's Devonshire. 
Mill's Pedigrees of Devonshire Families. 



—34— 

Hartlej' Society's Visitation of Devonshire. 

Hoare's Visitation of Devonshire, Wiltshire and Cornwall. 

Collins' " Peerage of England." 

Hay ward's Life of Edward VI. 

J. J. Howard's " Peerage and Family History." 

J. J. Howard's Pedigree of Berry-Norbet and West- 
minster. 

G. W. Eve, " Decorative Heraldry." 

Savage's Geneal. Diet. 

Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldiare Manuscripts. 

Church Register of Marriages and Burials, St. Mary 
Plympton, Devonshire. 

Court Records, Totness, Bodmin and Exeter. 

Oxford Hist. Soc. — Exeter College and Bodleian Library. 

Family Legends— Seymour Bible, the Wills and Inven- 
tories of Richard, John and Thomas Seymour. 

Declarations of Elizabeth Seymour Cary and Matthew 
Hatch. 



H 



.^ 



u 



5) 






o a,' , *■- 



■^ '' * ' ' \^ 






-s'^^^,- 
"- ■^ 



a I -I 






V 



^^\, 






1 ;-. r O 






,b 



.<J- 



,^q. 






,0 



,0 






<S^ ^ « o 



C. kT- 



*T^"^' 









• o. 






'^'0 

»^^ 



.-^^^ 



o V 






■x^' -^^ 



A 



•\ 



' ^ > 5 






G^ \:3 . ' o , ^ » /i. 



-?> 



.0 ^r', 






1-?^ 



(^►^ , o '•■ o 



y* 



0' 



<5>. 






.0 



.0 






V '■-•' 



V 



\ 



^ 






•>^ 












-i- A 



"v-.^ 



\^ 






0^ 



4 O. 
(TV ^ 









.-?> 



.^•^ 



o 



V' 






"-^ 



o 

-f^. 



0' .■'•°. "^^ V 



u 'J 



<i- 



0' 
A. o 



^ 



' - 



^^-n, 









•J « o < V 

0' 1. " * ^ 



'» 
^ r.^' 



A' 



V^ 



.\- 






O 












-^A 0^ 



^' 



.^^SJJW^:^' 












0' 






■)' , ' ' ■- - ■" > \> , - ' ' .' o o' 



a / » 



,\ 



# . 



^^^• 






-^Ao^ 



c^ 



..-?- 



H?.. 



x^-n^ 







>p -n... 



o V 



,0 



r 

> 









■x-S- 



'-6 



•^ a"- 



rX' 






^"U/M 



■-T'S- 



^^" 



M. >'v?^'A <i^ ""gi* '."^t^'^i^-i* ^ -^ '-^^ 



^^. 


















.0 



^^--^^ 



-^ 







/#M^-^ •^ 



-^ .r 






■' . « 5 ^G 




O , X 







:■>, 















-#^' 



.^ 



A 



« c 



"•^^ 



/^ 









. . « 






!^ 



.'V- oO« 



k^:. x^ ..^ .*^(^ 



^'^^- 



.0 



-^0 













\^ s • • , 




